Purpose of this document

This document outlines the objectives of the Riverse Standard and sets the general requirement for Project Developers for registering and operating Riverse projects and issuing Riverse Carbon Credits (RCC).

Welcome to the Riverse Documentation Hub—your go-to resource for everything related to our carbon registry: standard rules, procedures, and methodologies. Whether you are a project developer, partner, or carbon credit buyer, this platform is designed to provide you with all relevant information you might look in a efficient navigation system.

Why this documentation?

At Riverse, we believe that consistency, transparency, and adherence to well-defined standards are the cornerstones of trustful and success Voluntary Carbon Markets.

Our documentation is providing detailed guidance, rules and structured approaches to all processes of our carbon standard and registry.

Riverse Standard Documents

Our Riverse Standards Document section covers the essential rules and guidelines that govern our standard and registry across all methodologies and project types.

Riverse Methodologies

Each methodology gives specific requirements and quantification methods per project types.

Measurability

GHG emission reduction measurements shall aim for completeness, accuracy, transparency, and conservativeness.

If no Riverse methodology exists for a given project, documented scientific research can be proposed to establish a measurement method. This method shall be evaluated and validated by the Riverse Climate team and the VVB.

Real

The Project Developer shall submit a Monitoring Plan during the validation step that defines the list of Key Impact Indicators (KII).

For each KII in the Monitoring Plan, the Project Developer shall specify the update frequency and auditable source.

For each verification and issuance of RCCs, the Project Developer shall upload each KII with proof to the Impact Certification Platform.

Additionality

Permanence and risk of reversal

Projects eligible for removal RCCs are subject to the Permanence and risk of reversal criteria. Permanence and reversal risks are not evaluated for avoidance RCCs, because they are considered to have little to no material reversal risks.

By default, at least 3% of all verified removal RCCs shall be transferred to the buffer pool upon issuance.

Project Developers shall complete the Risk Assessment Template tailored to their specific project type, which is provided in the methodology documentation. This template guides Project Developers in evaluating the likelihood and severity of each risk type.

For each reversal risk type with a high or very high risk score, Project Developers shall develop a risk mitigation plan, or incur an additional 3% contribution of verified removal RCCs to the buffer pool.

If no methodology exists, the Project Developer shall suggest risks to consider in the PDD, which must be approved by the Riverse Certification team and the VVB. Documentation and proof must be provided to justify that the identification of risks was performed with a similar level of rigor, scientific accuracy, and conservativeness that is required for methodology development.

No double counting

Double use shall be prevented by the Riverse Registry, where each project is automatically assigned a unique identifier, with project ID, location, and Project Developer name and contact information. An immutable certificate is generated upon retirement.

Project Developers shall not use another program to issue carbon credits for the given mitigation activity, for the same year. Project Developers shall disclose any issuance of carbon credits for the same project prior to the crediting period, or with a different project scope.

Project Developers shall ensure that specified upstream and downstream actors in the supply chain have not and will not issue carbon credits for their role in the mitigation activity. Specific requirements on this topic may be made in methodologies.

Double claiming with NDCs shall be prevented by signed agreements with host countries and confirmation of corresponding adjustments. Such agreements will be made publicly available with the project documentation, and updated as needed.

Double claiming with national climate policies and emissions trading schemes shall be prevented by proof that the mitigation activity is outside the scope of such policies and schemes. If this is not the case, Project Developers must obtain proof of an accounting adjustment or cancellation in the emissions trading scheme.

For purposes of voluntary climate pledges and reporting (e.g. GHG protocol), Project Developers must inform upstream and downstream supply chain entities of claimed project/intervention/insetting emission reductions, report them to Riverse, document any transfer of emission reduction units, and seek guidance in cases of conflicting claims from reporting bodies like the GHG Protocol.

Co-benefits

Projects shall support between two and four quantifiable and verifiable environmental or social co-benefits. These must be in addition to their climate benefits that are already accounted for in the issuance of RCCs.

Co-benefits must be positive environmental or social impacts that are substantial, and would not have occurred without the intervention of the project.

Other relevant UN SDG sub-objectives or sustainability indicators may be suggested by Project Developers, and accepted at the discretion of the Riverse Certification team and the VVB.

Co-benefits shall be quantified and proven using the project’s GHG quantification results, primary data collection from the project, an LCA of the project or similar technology, or other reputable scientific documents. The tool, method, approach, and/or equations used for assessing co-benefits shall be described in methodology documents and/or DPDs.

Substitution

Projects shall prove that their project outputs have similar performance metrics to the baseline scenario and deliver equivalent functions.

Project Developers shall identify and quantify performance metrics to compare between the baseline and the project scenario. Specific metrics to consider are detailed in methodologies.

Environmental and Social Do No Harm Safeguards

If the project already has a legal permit (for example, construction permit, operation approval from authorities) that required similar stakeholder consultation or environmental and social impact assessments, Project Developers shall provide any documents related to those processes, and may be deemed exempt from the Riverse stakeholder consultation by the VVB and the Riverse Certification team.

Certain methodologies may define strict rules and cutoffs that may disqualify projects based on their environmental and social risk assessment results.

The Riverse Certification team or VVB may require annual monitoring of an environmental or social risk if they determine that the risk could lead to the project causing net harm.

Minimum ESDNH risks to assess

Risk assessments shall assess at least the following risks, which should be avoided and minimized:

Leakage

Project Developers shall follow the relevant methodology requirements for identifying, assessing and mitigating leakage. Potential risks and detailed instructions are identified at the methodology level.

Methodologies provide instructions on how to assess leakage and manage and, if necessary, deduct leakage emissions. Any project-specific leakage risk may incur additional leakage emission deduction, up to the discretion of the Project Developer, the VVB and the Riverse Certification team.

Technology Readiness Level

Projects shall at minimum reach TRL 6, which is described in the table above.

Targets alignment

Minimum impact

To renew certification at the end of the crediting period, projects may re-conduct a complete validation process using the current Riverse Standard Rules and methodology requirements.

For renewed projects, the crediting period shall be the total length of the combined crediting periods.

Presentation of Riverse

Riverse: A mission-driven company

Riverse is a simplified joint-stock company ("société par actions simplifiée") with its headquarters situated at 28 Avenue des Pépinières, 94260 Fresnes, France, and is registered in the Créteil Companies and Trade Register with the number 908 082 332.

As a mission-driven entity ("Société à Mission"), Riverse has a defined purpose pursuant to Article 1835 of the French Civil Code.

The company's mission is to create significant and positive environmental or social impact through its commercial and operational activities, and to conduct its business with exemplary professionalism in the pursuit of the collective interest. In alignment with its mission, the company is dedicated to:

• Advancing solutions that contribute a net environmental or social benefit to both the community and the planet;

• Engaging with partners and customers who share the company's values and objectives;

• Delivering significant value and impact through its partnerships and client interactions;

• Ensuring the dignity of individuals and promoting a healthy work-life balance for its employees.

Riverse Standard and Riverse Tech Infrastructure

Building upon its core mission, the simplified joint-stock company Riverse operates two entities:

• The Riverse Standard: A European crediting program within the voluntary carbon market, tailored for industrial projects that demonstrate the potential for significant reductions or sequestration of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The Riverse Standard prescribes exacting certification criteria, rooted in stringent scientific methodology and designed to align with the principal frameworks dedicated to fostering transparency and integrity in the voluntary carbon market.

• The Riverse Tech Infrastructure: Serving as the operational backbone for the Riverse Standard, this infrastructure comprises two principal components:

  • The Riverse Registry: Ensuring traceability and transparency, it maintains detailed records of Riverse Carbon Credits from issuance to retirement, thereby preventing double counting and adhering to the protocols recommended by carbon market integrity organizations.

  • The Impact Certification Platform: This platform streamlines the RCCs certification (validation and verification) process for Project Developers by offering tools for environmental impact assessment, documentation assembly, and simplifying validation and verification procedures. With features designed for third-party Validation and Verification Bodies (VVB), it promotes a transparent and efficient pathway for project auditing and RCC management.

Both entities are managed by the Riverse Executive Team and supported by the internal teams within Riverse.

Overview of the Riverse Organization:

Riverse Standard: Governance, roles, and responsibilities

The Riverse Standard's governance architecture is designed to ensure scientific rigor, independence and efficiency.

It is spearheaded by two principal independent entities: the Standard Advisory Board and the Technical Advisory Committee.

In addition to these independent governance entities, four specialized Riverse teams are dedicated to the standard's operational execution:

Conflict of interest, safeguards and grievance mechanisms

All Riverse ecosystem stakeholders are contractually linked with Riverse. The following stakeholders are publicly disclosed:

The following is the minimum list of stakeholders who must sign the policy:

• Members of the Executive board

• Members of the Secretariat, Standard Advisory Board

• Members of the Climate, Certification, R&D and Partnerships teams

• Members the Technical Advisory Board

• VVBs

Riverse Registry

• Project information, including documentation, detailed calculations, audit/verification/monitoring statements, as well as reports and legal representations

• Transparent issuance tracking, transfer and retirement/cancellation of units

• Individually identified units through unique serial numbers containing sufficient information to avoid double counting (type, geography, vintage)

• Unit status (issued, verified, retired, canceled), with full traceability of the chain of custody

Co-benefits

Global Warming Potentials

GHG emissions and reductions shall be calculated using the following IPCC Global Warming Potential (GWP) values for a 100 year horizon according to IPCC 2021 AR6, Chapter 7. The GWPs for the main greenhouse gasses are summarized below, and the full list of GWPs can be found in the IPCC AR6 Chapter 7 Supplementary Material, Table 7.SM.7.

Riverse Registry IT security standards

The following security measures are the minimum requirements for the Riverse Registry, and ensure confidentiality, integrity, and data availability:

• Data transfers shall always use industry-standard encryption technology (SSL/TLS/HTTPS).

• Application authentication shall be enabled and verified by a third-party provider that meets industry best practice, is internationally recognized, and is ISO27001 certified.

• Backend service and database hosting shall be enabled by a third-party provider that enables encryption.

• Administrative tools shall be provided 2FA for admin authentication and sign-in.

The Riverse Secretariat shall verify at least twice per calendar year that the IT security requirements are met, and summarize the findings in a report made publicly available on the Riverse website. The following elements shall be verified:

• Verify compliance with the above requirements

• Verify security vulnerability status and upgrade all JavaScript dependencies with npm.

• Review Authentication provider access

• Review Cloud provider IAM accounts and access

• Rotate database passwords, API keys (internal and external)

• Review Database connection allowlist

• Review repository history for leaked secrets

• Verify application authorization rules

Ramp up impacts

Some projects have particularly high environmental impacts in their first year(s) of operation. This can be caused by inefficiency in early stages of operations while ramping up their processes. For example, at the beginning of a project, there may be very high consumption of inputs for a rather low production of outputs. This does not include emissions of construction and infrastructure, which are amortized over many years.

In some cases, this ramp-up effect may lead the project to emit more GHGs than the baseline scenario in the first year of the crediting period. In this case, the project’s validation and verification of the first two years will be bundled. This way, the project’s net induced emissions from the first year are subtracted from the avoided emissions of the second year.

If the project is still a net emitter and does not avoid any emissions at the end of the second year of the crediting period, the project will be dropped from the Riverse certification process.

When RCCs are bundled for the first two years of a crediting period, the vintage is the second year.

Note that this ramp-up effect only relates to high volume or frequent use of consumables in the first year, not to fixed inputs such as machinery and buildings. This is because according to the LCA approach, the emissions of these long-lived inputs are distributed annually over their usable lifespan. Fixed inputs refer to products where the lifespan is more than 1 year, and includes objects such as machinery, tanks, pipelines, building materials, and concrete slabs. Consumables refer to inputs that are taken up by the process and consumed in order to create the product. Their use is usually recurring and ongoing, and include inputs such as electricity, water, fuel for transportation, feedstock inputs (for biogas), and replacement screens (for electronics reconditioning).

Avoided emissions: absolute decrease vs. smaller increase

There are two types of avoided emissions: those that lead to an absolute decrease in emissions, and those that lead to a smaller increase in emissions.

Absolute decrease: there is a real absolute decrease in emissions compared to the baseline scenario.

Smaller increase: there is a relative decrease in emissions compared to the baseline scenario, but still an absolute increase in emissions. This may happen when a project intervenes in a sector with growing demand, where overall production increases, so emissions increase over time.

All Riverse Carbon Credits are issued ex post, after the verification process.

Removal RCC

Removal RCCs are issued on Riverse’s registry under the mechanism label “removal”. They represent one tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent captured and stored: 1 removal RCC = 1 t CO2eq.

Avoidance RCC

Avoidance RCCs are calculated by comparing GHG emissions of the project to the ones of a reference or baseline scenario that would have occurred without the project.

Avoidance RCCs are classified on Riverse’s registry under the mechanism label “avoidance”. They represent one avoided tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent: 1 avoidance RCC = 1 t CO2eq.

Credit pools

Credit pools are defined as a group of Riverse Carbon Credits from the same project, mechanism and vintage year. Each transaction in the Riverse Registry may cover credits from one credit pool. For example, separate transactions are required to retire credits from two different credit pools.

A project is uniquely described on the registry by:

• Project registry ID

• Project name

• Name of the Project Developer

• Location

• Host country

• Type of mechanism (avoidance and/or removal)

• Crediting period

• Validation body

• Other labels where relevant (e.g. CORSIA, Article 6, CCP…)

Each RCC is uniquely described on the registry by:

• unique identifier

• Project registry ID

• Vintage year (year of verified activity in verification)

• Type of mechanism (avoidance or removal)

• Methodology ID

• Riverse Standard Rules version number

• Host country (inherited from Project)

• Other labels where relevant (e.g. CORSIA, Article 6, CCP…)

RCC status on the registry

Riverse Carbon Credits and provisional credits can have different statuses on the Riverse Registry:

Verified RCCs may have labels, which are supplementary information and do not change the inherent status of a verified avoidance or removal RCC. Labels may cover, for example:

• Permanence horizons: e.g. 100 or 1000 year permanence for removal RCCs

• Compliance with trading schemes: e.g. CORSIA eligible, Article 6 eligible

• Accredited: e.g. ICROA accredited, ICVCM accredited

Provisional credits & Pre-purchase agreements

Provisional credits are estimated upon project validation for the projected volume of emission avoidance/removal over the project’s crediting period. They are conservatively calculated.

Pre-purchase agreements are signed agreements between the PD and a buyer with defined volumes and prices of Riverse Carbon Credits. These can be made once provisional credits have been estimated and the project has been validated.

Provisional credits are only used to track pre-purchase agreements for buyers. Their property rights can not be transferred to the buyer until the mitigation activity occurs and they are verified (hence become RCCs).

The general GHG reduction quantification approach and components are outlined below. Detailed instructions and requirements can be found in Riverse methodologies.

General guidance

Riverse Carbon Credits shall be calculated by subtracting the GHG emissions and removals of the project scenario from the emissions and removals of a baseline scenario, or reference scenario, that would have occurred without the implementation of the project.

Functional unit

Functional units shall include characteristics such as:

• Type of product/service

• Amount

Functional units may include characteristics such as:

• Performance specifications

• Geographic location

• Duration

System Boundary

The system boundary shall cover the project scope, and include:

• all processes under direct control of the project and

• the key upstream and downstream processes.

Processes may include raw material extraction, delivery of supplies, processing, manufacturing, distribution, use, retail, distribution, and waste treatment.

Processes with the lowest contributions to impacts, which each account for less than 1% of total impacts, may be excluded from the GHG quantification. These processes shall be transparently identified and justified.

Due to the comparative measurement approach, processes that are identical in the project and baseline scenario may be excluded, since they will not affect the comparative results.

Baseline scenario selection

The Guidance on Avoided Emissions by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) shall be followed to select the baseline scenario (see figure below).

According to the Guidance on Avoided Emissions from the WBCSD, average market solutions shall be assumed by default for the baseline scenario. Only when a project solution is known to substitute one specific technology (e.g. the best available technology, or a product from one specific manufacturer), may the specific technology be used as a baseline.

Conservative assumptions, values, and processes shall be chosen when selecting a baseline scenario, to avoid overestimation of GHG emission reductions. Average market solutions shall be determined based on practices in the country/region of the project, and statistically relevant historical information.

If the project activity is multifunctional, the baseline scenario shall cover all functions of the project.

When the average market solution is represented by a market mix of solutions, the market mix shall include the portion of the project solution that is already used in the market.

The duration of validity of the baseline scenario selection shall be defined in methodologies.

Input data

Project GHG emissions and removals shall be quantified using primary data from project operations for operating projects, or estimated data for planned projects. The estimated data shall be used for project validation, and shall be replaced with actual data once the project begins operations for the verification of emission reductions.

All measurements from the project must be verifiable and based on recent conditions (no more than 1 year old). These measurements include quantities (volume, mass, number) and type of products and inputs.

All background data (for example, emission factors, rates of recycling, composition of national electricity grid) shall be derived from traceable, transparent, unbiased, and reputable sources.

All assumptions and estimates shall be conservative, transparently presented and justified.

For geographic accuracy and consistency across projects, national-level background data should be prioritized. Local (region, state, city-scale) or global sources may be used if justified.

Uncertainty assessment

Qualitative estimates of uncertainty shall be justified ranging from none, low, medium, to high. A choice of “None” is only applicable for measurements of primary data that have strong, immutable sources of proof.

Project Developers shall assess uncertainty for the following areas at the project-level:

• assumptions

• selection of the specific baseline scenario

• measurements

• estimates or secondary data used for the project assessment

Methodologies shall include assessments of uncertainty for the following areas at the methodology-level:

• assumptions

• baseline scenario selection guidance

• equations and models

• estimates or secondary data used for all projects under the given methodology

All practical steps must be taken to achieve a low level of uncertainty for each area.

Areas that have high levels of uncertainty shall use the most conservative reasonable option, to avoid overestimation of GHG emission reductions.

Based on the uncertainty levels estimated for the above individual areas, Project Developers shall justify an overall uncertainty estimate of low, medium or high for the project’s GHG emission reductions.

The uncertainty estimate shall account for the sensitivity of the total GHG emission reductions to each assessed area. This way, for example, an area might have high uncertainty, but if that area has a small effect on the total GHG emission reduction calculations, then the level of uncertainty is acceptable and can be considered lower.

The overall uncertainty estimate shall be translated into the discount factor, representing the percent of credits that will not be issued, using the following:

• Low uncertainty: 3%

• Medium uncertainty: 6%

• High uncertainty: 9% or higher

Revising Riverse Standard Documentation

The revision of the Procedures Manual follows the same process.

Major revisions

Major revisions are tracked through the first number after the standard document name (e.g. Riverse Standard Rules V1). Major revisions include three phases: submission, review, and approval.

Submission Phase

Open feedback: All the latest versions of the Riverse Standard Rules and methodologies documentation are published on Riverse’s website. This allows any interested party to be able to comment on every document at any time—not only during dedicated public consultations.

To ensure the relevance and rigor of the Riverse Standard Documentation, the Climate team and the Secretariat actively monitor all references, and propose changes from referenced standards and tools (IPCC, ISO…).

Compilation of feedback: The Secretariat compiles feedback into a document called the 'Standard Revision Request'.

Review Phase

Formulation of Revision Proposal: After analyzing each feedback, the Secretariat drafts a 'Revision Proposal'. This proposal outlines the changes deemed necessary to the Riverse Standard Documentation based on the feedback received.

Submission to SAB and deliberation: the Revision Proposal is presented to the SAB for their critical evaluation. If the Revision Proposal is validated, the SAB decides whether the proposed revision is of a nature that demands public input.

Approval phase

Integration of Public Feedback: the Secretariat integrates feedback from the public consultation into the existing 'Revision Proposal'. The outcome of this integration is a 'Final Standard Revision Proposition'.

SAB Review and Approval: The 'Final Standard Revision Proposition' is then presented to the SAB for their final approval. The SAB ensures that feedback from the public consultation phase has been genuinely and appropriately integrated.

After the revision procedure is completed, each contributor receives an update on how their remark has been treated.

Project compliance: Projects that are already validated must become compliant with revised rules upon their next verification. They do not need to undergo a new validation process. The VVB shall check for gaps and compliance during the verification audit. If projects are incompatible with revised rules, no new RCCs will be issued for that project, but their verified RCCs will remain valid on the Riverse registry.

Minor revisions

• Correct typographical or formatting errors that do not affect the meaning or application of the standard.

• Update references to external documents, tools, or standards without changing the core methodology.

• Adjust procedural steps or timelines to improve clarity or efficiency without altering the overall process.

• Add or update examples or case studies to aid understanding, without introducing new requirements.

• Simplify or streamline documentation language to improve accessibility, without affecting the technical content.

• Formalize processes that are already implemented in practice.

Creating new Riverse Standard Documentation

Procedure and document development:

• Internal process setting: All Riverse Standard Documentation is initially drafted internally by the Climate team.

• Basis of standards: procedures are tailored to Riverse’s operations, but should draw inspiration and guidance from established standards such as ISO 9001 and ISO 31000, ensuring global compliance and recognition.

Instead of a Revision Proposal as described in the previous section, a creation proposal is submitted to the Standard Advisory Board for validation.

A public consultation is conducted for the creation of any new Riverse Standard Documentation.

Creating a new methodology

Submission

The Methodology Creation Proposal is reviewed first by the Riverse Climate team, and if approved then it is reviewed by the SAB for final approval.

If the proposal is rejected by the SAB, it then decides whether to earmark it for reworking or, based on the gravity of the concerns, abandon it altogether.

Development

To research and develop the methodology, the Climate team will gather the working group and consult the TAC members on a regular basis. The first step of methodology development shall always be a literature review. Following steps depend on the needs of each methodology.

The minimum requirements for a Riverse methodology include the following:

Review and acceptance

Once a first version of the methodology has been drafted, the Secretariat organizes a 30-day public consultation by publishing a Call for Consultation. The Secretariat and Climate team integrates feedback into a new Final Methodology Creation Proposition.

The Final Methodology Creation Proposal is then validated by the SAB, which ensures that the feedback from the TAC, experts, and the public consultation was integrated.

Revising a methodology

Methodologies are adaptable to ensure their relevance and robustness. To streamline updates and maintain transparency, the Climate team implements:

Discontinuing a methodology

A methodology may be discontinued if:

• shifts in scientific consensus indicate it no longer aligns with best practices

• it fails to achieve measurable carbon reductions

• it is no longer additional

• it overestimates credits and cannot be revised to ensure conservativeness

Methodologies are evaluated against these criteria at least once every three years during the mandatory major revision process, though they can also be reviewed and discontinued at any time if necessary.

Projects already validated under a discontinued methodology may continue using it until their next verification. After that, they must transition to a new methodology or become ineligible for new RCCs. Previously issued RCCs remain valid and tradable.

Public consultations

Decision by the SAB: Public consultations are mandatory for all major revisions of the Riverse Standard Documents and methodologies. For other revisions, the Standard Advisory Board (SAB) decides, based on their judgment and complexity of the topic at hand, whether to launch a public consultation.

Publishing the Call for Consultation: the Secretariat initiates the public consultation with the publication of a Call for Consultation. This call is widely broadcasted through relevant channels to ensure maximum outreach, inviting Project Developers, carbon credit resellers / brokers / marketplaces, Net Zero engaged corporates, Validation and Verification bodies, greentech experts, climate and environmental scientists and the general public to provide their insights and feedback on the topic. The minimum duration of the consultation is 30 days.

For all new methodologies, the Secretariat should organize a webinar to explain the rationale of the methodology and an overview of its requirements.

Integration into Final Proposition: the Secretariat then integrates this feedback into the existing proposal. This revised document, now termed the Final Standard Revision Proposition, harmonizes both the initial proposal and the feedback from the public consultation.

Remote auditing

Remote audits (those that do not include a physical site visit by an auditor) can optimize audit efficiency while maintaining the integrity of the audit process. The objective of a remote audit is to establish confidence in the VVB certification process by direct observations carried out through an electronic medium:

• Videographic evidence is required for remote audits. The video should allow the VVB to confirm that each component is true, and will typically consist of a tour of the site with commentary.

• Formats may include video calls with the auditors or pre-recorded videos.

The use of remote assessments by VVB of a given project may be requested in site validation assessment. Additional remote audits for verification are at the discretion of the VVB, who is entitled to reject any request from PDs.

Sequential verifications

To maintain impartiality and credibility, and reduce complacency and bias, a single VVB may conduct a maximum of three (3) sequential verifications for a specific project.

Upon reaching the sequential verification limit with a VVB, the PD shall be granted a transition period of six (6) months to engage a new VVB for the subsequent verification.

PDs must maintain comprehensive records of all verifications, including the VVBs involved, to demonstrate compliance with this rule.

Regular audits will be conducted to ensure PDs adhere to this rule. Non-compliance may result in penalties or suspension of the project's validation status.

Performance review

The following metrics will be employed to evaluate a VVB's performance:

• Timeliness: Adherence to stipulated timelines for project verification.

• Accuracy: Correctness of verification processes, calculations, and conclusions.

• Consistency: Uniform application of standards and methodologies across different projects.

• Communication: Effectiveness and clarity in communication with PDs and other stakeholders.

• Integrity: Adherence to ethical guidelines, including conflict of interest declarations

Each VVB is required to submit an annual Performance Report that details its activities, challenges, and areas of improvement relating to its work with the Riverse validation and verification process. This report should provide insights into the VVB's verification approach, methodologies employed, and training undertaken.

Project Developers are asked to provide feedback on the VVB's performance after each validation and verification process, as part of the Riverse satisfaction survey. This feedback is considered in the VVB performance review.

The Standard Secretariat annually reviews the annual Performance Reports and assess VVBs based on the established performance metrics. VVBs are encouraged to continually enhance their skills, methodologies, and processes. Training resources, workshops, and seminars specific to the Riverse Standard will be provided to support this endeavor.

All parties involved must sign the policy. The following is the minimum list of stakeholders who must be included:

• Members of the Executive board

• Members of the Secretariat, Standard Advisory Board

• Members of the Climate, Certification, R&D and Partnerships teams

• Members the Technical Advisory Board

• VVBs

• Contractors to the Riverse Standard involved in at least one of the procedures

Standard Advisory Board

The Standard Advisory Board (SAB) is independent from Riverse SAS. It is responsible for reviewing suggested changes to the Riverse Standard Rules, Procedures Manual, and the Riverse Registry procedures.

The SAB shall:

• Ensure Riverse’s activity is in line with its foundational mission, delineated in its statutes

• Accept or reject changes to the Riverse Standard Rules, Procedure Manual, and Riverse Registry Procedures, specifying written reasons for the decisions

• Provide strategic guidance for the Standard and make recommendations to align Riverse processes and rules with relevant regulations and integrity frameworks.

The SAB shall be appointed following the process bellow:

• The inaugural SAB was selected by the Riverse Executive Team, following interviews with candidates who were distinguished by their expertise in areas relevant to the board's focus.

• New SAB members are nominated by the Riverse Executive Team and confirmed through a decision made by the current SAB members.

• The Chair of the SAB is elected by its members from among themselves by a simple majority vote for a one-year term

• The mandate for SAB members is tacitly renewed every year

Only SAB members and the Chair have the right to vote on decision items during SAB meetings. When the Chair calls for a vote on any issue, decisions will be made by a simple majority. In the event of a tie, the Chair will cast the deciding vote to determine the outcome.

Technical Advisory Committee

The Riverse Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is an external entity from the Riverse organization. Its mission is to bring in-depth expertise on each sector covered by Riverse.

The Riverse Executive and Climate teams will establish the TAC’s missions as necessary. Typical missions may include the following:

• Review a specific project application and deliver a Technical Analysis report

• Review a new methodology, or its revision

• Review a specific methodological aspect on their domain of expertise

• Conduct solutions-based scientific research on their domain of expertise

Members of the TAC should be knowledgeable in at least one specialized area relating to the Riverse Standard focus (such as, but not limited to, refurbishment and recycling processes, bioenergy, biobased construction materials, biomass carbon removal and storage, or carbon markets).

TAC members should prove the following skills:

• Expertise in an area covered by the Riverse Standard Rules, existing methodologies, or a sector considered for future methodology development

• Deep understanding of environmental topics

The TAC serves as an expert consultative committee for the Riverse Standard, without decision-making authority. Should a technical issue arise necessitating a decision, the SAB may seek a recommendation from a TAC member. However, the final decision will be made by the SAB.

Executive Team

The Riverse Executive Team is tasked with operational and strategic functions within the organization. Their key responsibilities include:

• Overseeing daily operations to ensure efficiency and alignment with organizational goals

• Determining the long-term strategy and direction

• Making essential decisions for Riverse.

• Reporting to and integrating advice from the SAB into the company's operations and strategy

The Executive Team of Riverse is appointed by a collective decision of the Riverse SAS partners, in accordance with the constitutive statutes of Riverse.

Decisions for which the executive team is responsible are made by a simple majority vote within the executive team.

Secretariat

The Secretariat of Riverse holds a fundamental administrative and coordinating role within the organization's structure.

The Secretariat’s main responsibilities are outlined as follows:

• Collecting and synthesizing feedback on the Riverse Standard Rules and methodologies, preparing them for review and validation by the governing bodies.

• Serving as a communicative bridge, it conveys information between the Executive Team, the Certification and Climate Teams, and the SAB

• Organizing and documenting public consultations.

Climate team

The Climate team is responsible for the climate science and integrity of the Riverse Standard Rules.

The Climate team’s main tasks are the following:

• Regularly revise and improve the Riverse Standard Rules

• Monitor relevant references and scientific progress to integrate into the Riverse methods

• Develop new methodologies, and regularly revise and improve existing ones

• Coordinate with the TAC for methodologies creation and revision

• Certification team and VVB trainings

Certification team

The Certification team’s main tasks are the following:

• Improve the validation process to make it as rigorous, transparent and practical as possible

• Review Project Applications

• Accompany Project Developers in the certification process of their project

• Coordinate with VVBs for outputs of validation/verification audits

• Run VVB performance oversight

• Manage the Riverse Registry: register projects, deregister projects, process the issuance/verification/cancellation of credits.

Purpose of this document

The aim of this document is to present guidelines for Validation and Verification Bodies (VVBs) for conducting comprehensive evaluations of greenhouse gas emission avoidance and/or removals of Project Developers under the Riverse Standard.

• Validation Audits

• Verification Audits

Introduction

This guidance is part of the larger framework of the Riverse Standard system, which encompasses the Riverse Standard Rules and the methodologies. Moreover, it complements the Riverse Procedures Manual that delineates project registration and supervision This document offers targeted guidance for auditors performing validation and verification audits within the specialized scope of Project Developers.

The guidelines detailed in this document become binding upon its formal release. Post this date, any VVB that meets the requirements can contribute to the validation and verification of Riverse Standard Projects.

Existing VVBs must reapply and provide the necessary documentation outlined in this text before continuing validation or verification tasks.

For VVBs who have an existing formalized agreement with Project Developers before the activation date of this guidance, a grace period of twelve months is given to apply again and comply with the new requirements.

Henceforth, Project Developers can only collaborate with VVBs officially recognized by Riverse, based on the requirements and processes defined herein. Projects already registered that haven't transitioned to the Riverse Standard Rules might be subjected to different review templates than those mentioned here.

VVB acknowledgement

I hereby acknowledge that I have read and understand the above requirements.

Company name:____________________

Name:_________________

Signature: ____________________________________ Date:_____________

This template shall be used to register all operating sites. All sites where the project operates shall be registered. This includes all factories, facilities, or operations under direct control of the project developer, whose activities are issued carbon credits.

This document reports all activities carried out by the Project Developer during the year and its respective achievements. It serves as a channel to track the Project’s progress and communicate it to the general public.

How to use this methodology

This methodology is composed of modules, which allows Project Developers to choose the relevant modules for their project depending on their specific operations.

Modules are arranged into three module categories: carbon capture, transformation, and carbon storage. The modules available in the Riverse BiCRS methodology are presented in the figure below.

Modules are like mini-methodologies that only cover a part of the project life-cycle. Combining the relevant modules for a project results in a complete picture of eligibility criteria, GHG reduction quantification requirements, required data, monitoring plans, and other instructions for Riverse certification.

For a given project, multiple modules from each Module category may be selected if they are relevant to the project. For example, most projects will likely use both Transportation and Infrastructure and machinery modules from the Transformation category. At least one module must be selected from the carbon capture, transformation, and carbon storage categories.

Modules are compiled seamlessly on the Riverse Certification Platform. Project Developers only need to select the modules that are relevant for their project.

Access the modules

This methodology covers projects that transform and store biomass into a permanent carbon removal solution, also called biomass carbon removal and storage (BiCRS). This methodology is composed of modules, which give more specific requirements and instructions for different parts of project operations. This methodology document provides general requirements and instructions that are relevant for all BiCRS projects, regardless of the specific modules they use.

Introduction

It is widely acknowledged that in addition to reducing global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, carbon dioxide must be removed from the atmosphere and permanently sequestered. One way to do this is through Biomass Carbon Removal and Storage (BiCRS), which involves a range of technologies that use plant biomass to remove carbon dioxide (CO$_2$) from the atmosphere and store that CO$_2$ underground or in long-lived products.

Eligible activities

All projects certified under this methodology must convert biomass into permanent carbon storage solutions.

Avoidance Riverse Carbon Credits (RCCs) may be issued for eligible project activities, such as energy production.

Any share of removals coming from non-biogenic carbon are not eligible for removal RCCs under this methodology.

Carbon removals shall be ensured for at least 100 years, according to the Riverse Standard Rules permanence criteria. Each project shall transparently disclose their permanence horizon of 100 or 1000+ years.

Technologies that are not detailed in a module, but that meet the general requirements of the present methodology, may be considered on a case by case basis.

Project scope

The default project scope shall be defined in the Carbon storage modules.

Eligibility criteria

The eligibility criteria requirements that are applicable to all projects under this methodology are detailed in the sections below. Other eligibility criteria requirements shall be taken from the accompanying modules and Riverse Standard Rules:

Additionality

No double counting

BiCRS projects have a risk of double issuance of credits if the user of the removal solution and/or operator of the storage site also seeks credit issuance. Project Developers shall:

• Identify all direct downstream users/buyers/actors in their supply chain, providing the company/organization name, name of an individual contact person at the company/organization, and their contact information (email address at minimum).

• Provide proof that measures have been taken to avoid double issuance with those actors, such as through signed agreements, packaging/marketing material stating carbon credits have already been issued, and/or sales contract clauses.

If the Project Developer proves that the removal solution stays within the project scope all the way through storage, and it is never sold or transferred, then the requirements above may be disregarded.

At the validation stage for projects under development, this information may not be determined yet. In this case, upon validation Project Developers shall describe any information available on the expected buyers, and provide signed agreements committing to provide the necessary information upon verification. During the verification stage, Project Developers shall provide the information described above in order to issue RCCs.

Environmental and social do no harm

ESDNH risk evaluation

Targets alignment

• Biochar use in concrete: 73%

• Biochar replacement of peat or horticultural products: 58%

• Energy co-products: 45%

The scope of the reduction is the system boundary used in GHG quantification, described in the Baseline scenario and Project scenario sections below.

This shall be proven using the GHG reduction quantification method described below and in the relevant modules.

This eligibility criteria may be disregarded for projects that only issue removal RCCs.

GHG quantification

The net removals for a project shall be calculated by summing the emissions and removals of each module used by that project.

Calculations of GHG emissions for the baseline and project scenarios shall follow a robust, recognized method and good practice guidance. The overall methodological approach is a comparative life cycle assessment (LCA) at the project-scale, based on ISO 14064-2:2019.

BiCRS projects may be eligible for removal and avoidance Riverse Carbon Credits. Removal and avoidance RCCs are calculated and issued according to two completely separate accounting mechanisms, described below. This conservative approach results in double counting the project's induced emissions, and avoids the need for allocation of emissions/removals.

Functional unit

The functional unit shall be 1 tonne of carbon storage solution (e.g. 1 tonne of biochar spread on soils, 1 tonne of biomass buried...).

Co-product allocation

BiCRS projects may result in multiple products in addition to the primary carbon storage component. Emissions from multifunctional processes shared among co-products may be allocated across the respective products. However, emissions from processes exclusive to a single product (e.g., dedicated delivery of carbon storage products) must be fully attributed to that product.

If the co-product is a nonvaluable waste, then no allocation is required and all GHG emissions are allocated to the main product.

If the co-product is valuable and eligible for avoidance RCCs, then no allocation is performed, and process emissions are counted towards both the avoidance GHG accounting and the removal GHG accounting. This is a conservative approach to separately handling removal and avoidance accounting schemes.

If the co-product is valuable and eligible for removal RCCs, then emissions may be allocated to between the co-products. It is best practice to perform allocation based on an underlying characteristic that best represents the main function of the products. Here the main function is carbon removal, so allocation shall be based on the proportion of carbon removal of the two products, in tonnes of carbon.

Baseline scenario

A baseline scenario must be included for any project that issues avoidance RCCs. The baseline scenario represents the GHG emissions from the product or activity that is avoided by the project activity, i.e. the GHG emissions that would have occurred in the absence of the project.

Specific instructions for definition and modeling of baseline scenarios are available in the relevant module documents.

Project scenario

Modules include specific instructions on calculating GHG emissions and removals for the relevant processes.

Each project must use at least one module from the following categories: carbon capture, transformation and carbon storage.

Risk evaluation template

Projects are requested to send this letter to local communities and stakeholders. This letter should articulate the project's intent to issue RCC as a means to finance its operations and monetize its mitigation activities.

As required in the Riverse Double counting policy, Project Developers seeking to obtain the CORSIA or Article 6 label on Riverse Carbon Credits must provide an official Letter of Authorisation from the Host Country.

This is a Transformation Module and covers processing and energy use related to the project. This module is part of the Riverse BiCRS methodology, which allows Project Developers to choose the relevant modules for their project, and shall be used with the necessary accompanying modules.

Scope of the module

This module covers all processing stages and non-transport energy inputs related to BiCRS projects. It is intended to cover all eligibility criteria and GHG quantification for all processes that are not included in the other BiCRS modules: feedstock production, transport, infrastructure/machinery, and carbon storage. Specific processes vary by project, and may include but are not limited to:

• storing, drying, mixing, shredding and grinding of biomass feedstock

• operation of pyrolysis/gasification machinery

• direct emissions from off-gas released to the atmosphere (e.g. methane)

• purification, liquefication, and other post-processing of products

• use of electricity, gas, heat, water, or other material inputs

• waste treatment and management of non-valuable co-products

Eligibility criteria

The eligibility criteria requirements specific to this module are detailed in the sections below. Other eligibility criteria requirements shall be taken from the accompanying modules and methodologies:

Environmental and social do no harm

Project Developers shall prove that the project does not contribute to substantial environmental and social harms.

Projects must follow all European, national, and local environmental regulations related to, for example, syngas combustion national emission regulations.

ESDNH risk evaluation

• Pests and pathogen growth from biomass feedstock storage

• Leachate and runoff from biomass feedstock storage

• Gaseous emissions from pyrolysis/gasification/combustion

• Improper disposal of waste by-products (ash, tar, residue...) causing soil and water contamination

• Inefficient use of waste heat

• Worker exposure to particulate matter or other gaseous pollutants from pyrolysis

• Worker exposure to dust from biomass shredding/grinding, respiratory risks

The processes covered in this module are highly dependent on the project type, so not all risks may be relevant to a given project. Project Developers may explain how a risk is not applicable to their project.

GHG quantification

The GHG reduction quantification instructions from all other modules used by the project must be used in conjunction with the present module in order to obtain full life-cycle GHG reduction quantifications. It is a catch-all module that includes all relevant processes that are not included in other modules.

Monitoring and quantification may be done per Production Batch, or per calendar year. Verification shall be done annually by summing the GHG reduction quantifications for each production batch produced in the calendar year.

The system boundary of this quantification section includes GHG emissions from at least the following mandatory activities:

• Electricity and fuel production

• Fuel combustion

• Direct emissions of off-gas/flue gas

• Water use

• Waste treatment

Data sources

The required primary data for GHG reduction calculations from projects are presented in Table 1. These data shall be provided for each production batch and made publicly available.

Table 1 Summary of primary data needed from projects and their source for initial project certification and validation. Asterisks (*) indicate which data are required to be updated annually during verification (see Monitoring Plan section).

No other secondary data sources are used in this module.

Energy types

Because energy is expected to be the most important input in this module, additional details are provided regarding how to model energy.

Projects may only use renewable electricity emission factors for their energy consumption if:

• the energy production is directly linked to the project site, and can prove that there is a physical link, or

• the project holds renewable energy certificates (REC) (e.g. guarantee of origin, GO) plus an energy contract or purchase agreement for the concerned energy. In other words, the project can prove the coupled use of the energy and its corresponding REC.

Use of only a REC is not sufficient and shall be counted as grid electricity.

Electricity grid emission factors shall be taken for the national grid (at the maximum granularity), and if possible, regional mixes shall be used.

GHG emissions from fuel use shall include both the upstream extraction and processing of fuel, plus the direct emissions from combustion.

Co-product allocation

Project scenario

Based on the project's detailed process diagram, activities and inputs shall be selected for inclusion in the module and listed.

For each input, Project Developers shall provide the amount used and units per Production Batch and/or per calendar year.

Uncertainty assessment

Uncertainty may come from project data, but this is estimated to be negligible, since it is required to come from a direct measurement.

This translates to no minimum expected discount factor based on this module.

Monitoring plan

Monitoring Plans for this module shall include, but are not limited to, tracking of the following information for each Production Batch and/or each calendar year:

• Amount and type of any input/emission that makes up more than 30% of project life-cycle GHG emissions

• Amount and type of any input/emission that makes up between 10-30% of project life-cycle GHG emissions and is expected to vary by more than 30% between Production Batches

The Project Developer is the party responsible for adhering to the Monitoring Plan.

Appendix

The table below presents a non-exhaustive selection of Ecoinvent activities that may be used in the GHG reduction calculations for this module. Additional activities may be used for any project, if the following selection does not cover all relevant activities.

Table A1 List of ecoinvent 3.10 processes used in the GHG reduction quantification model, all processes are from the cutoff database

Risk evaluation template

This is a Carbon Capture Module and covers the sourcing of biomass feedstock for carbon storage projects. This module is part of the Riverse BiCRS methodology, which allows Project Developers to choose the relevant modules for their project, and shall be used with the necessary accompanying modules.

General

Scope of the module

This module covers use of biomass feedstock for permanent carbon removal and storage. Eligible biomasses are those that:

• could not have been used as main material products,

• were not grown for the purpose of CDR or bioenergy production.

For simplification, all feedstocks that meet the above requirements will be referred to hereafter as waste. Biomass feedstocks are categorized accordingly:

Eligible Project Developers

• Land owners or managers where biomass is cultivated or collected are not eligible Project Developers.

Eligibility criteria

The eligibility criteria requirements specific to this module are detailed in the sections below. Other eligibility criteria requirements shall be taken from the accompanying modules and methodologies:

Environmental and social do no harm

Project Developers shall prove that the project does not contribute to substantial environmental and social harms.

Projects must follow all national, local and European (if located in Europe) environmental regulations related to, for example, biomass harvesting, and forest management.

ESDNH risk assessment

• Disruption of soil health when collecting and exporting organic matter

• Presence of heavy metals, toxins or other chemical pollutants in the biomass⁠

• Spread of diseases or invasive species

• Cultivation of feedstock

• Deforestation from use of forestry products as feedstock

• Distant transport of feedstock inputs (>100 km)

Leakage

Biomass feedstock sourcing must not contribute to activity shifting leakage.

The requirement that biomass feedstock must be classified as waste prevents activity shifting leakage. Consequently, the evidence provided in the "Environmental and Social Do No Harm" section shall also be applied here to verify that the feedstock is waste.

Several other types of leakage risks are already covered by other components of this module:

• Displacement of soil carbon storage: a small amount of soil carbon storage is assumed and modeled in the Baseline Scenario where relevant, effectively deducted from the project's carbon storage.

• Upstream and downstream emissions: considered in the life-cycle based GHG quantifications in companion modules.

GHG quantification

The GHG reduction quantification instructions from all other modules used by the project must be used in conjunction with the present module in order to obtain full life-cycle GHG reduction quantifications.

Data sources

The required data from all projects using biomass feedstocks are presented in Table 2.

Table 2 Summary of primary data needed from projects and their source for initial project certification and validation. Asterisks (*) indicate which data are required to be updated annually during verification (see Monitoring Plan section).

Assumptions

Major assumptions in this module include:

Project Scenario

Baseline Scenario

The Baseline Scenario shall include permanent carbon storage that would have occurred anyway in the absence of the project.

Although most biomass carbon would be released before the CDR project's permanence horizon, a small fraction is stabilized permanently as soil carbon. This portion is accounted for in the Baseline Scenario and deducted from the project's carbon removal capacity.

The uncertainty around biomass carbon being 1) naturally incorporated into the soil and 2) converted to a stable carbon form is high, influenced by factors such as climate, soil type, soil health, and land use, making it hard to estimate for individual projects. Thus, it's assumed that 0.5% of the carbon in the biomass feedstock will be permanently stored in soils.

Uncertainty assessment

For projects that include baseline permanent carbon storage, the assumption that 0.5% of carbon is permanently sequestered is has moderate uncertainty, but the total net project removals is not sensitive to this assumption. Therefore, this translates to an expected discount factor of at least 3% for projects that include baseline permanent carbon storage.

Monitoring plan

Monitoring Plans for this module shall include, but are not limited to, tracking of the following information for each reporting period:

• Mass, type and source of all biomass feedstocks collected by the project.

• Sustainable forestry certification (if applicable)

The Project Developer is the party responsible for adhering to the Monitoring Plan.

Chemical analyses of feedstock

Chemical analyses shall be defined by the carbon storage module and may include but are not limited to:

Risk evaluation template

Open public consultations

Public consultations are open for a minimum of 30 days. All relevant details can be accessed here with the results of these consultations.

Closed public consultations